So it’s a war war? I mean I agree that the level of US support is probably unprecedented: literally on the scale of the defense budget of the invading country. And the active sharing of real-time actionable tactical intelligence is also probably unprecedented. If you’re saying it’s not a proxy war because the US involvement is higher than you’d expect for a proxy war, then yes I agree. And yes, I’m very much against a war war with Russia but also a proxy war with Russia. And certainly I’m against the extremely vigorous proxy war we’re fighting now. So a low key proxy war would be better than the current proxy war, and the current proxy war is better than a war war (although I think it puts us on a plausible path for an actual shooting war). But I’m against all of it. Not that my view matters, you guys are getting your war, there’s broad bipartisan support in government for the war.
My favorite conspiracy theory is that Big Capital is itching to get back into Russia and so are feeding the American First Right and the Disaffected Left to not offer aid to Ukraine so Russia can win easily and these companies can get back to making money. A Chomsky-Trump-Citibank alliance if you will.
There is not “broad bipartisan support of war.” There is strong bipartisan support to help Ukraine defend against an invasion and genocide. Even countries like sweden, Canada and many others who didn’t put a cent into Vietnam, Iraq or any conflict that should not have happened are sending tons of resources! Why do you think this is? Do you think the Canadian and Swedish public are warmongering like you have said the US is?
This US centric view where no one else has any autonomy is so weird! It’s funny that like keed and 10 of the most insufferable people on Twitter have the same line of thought here, not used by anyone else. It’s keed, Greenwald, MTG and like 5 other geniuses hoping this will stick.
Damn that’s a corker! If true Big Capital’s manufacturing consent game is really slipping if they’re trying to message through me, Don, and Noam! All while the Washington Post, NYT, and TV news are all blaring for war.
Broad bipartisan support for the proxy war that the US is fighting in Ukraine I mean. Sure, defending against the Russian invasion. I think that the Canadians and Swedes are supporting Ukraine for the same reason you are: you’re horrified by the brutal invasion and want to help the Ukrainians defend themselves.
I’m not saying what the Ukrainians should do or have done, I’m saying what I think that my country should do or should have done. This strikes me as appropriate: I’m responsible for what my country does and not responsible for what other countries do. Of course I have more to say about my country’s foreign policy than other countries’ foreign policy. Just because I focus on what my country does or should do doesn’t mean that Ukraine doesn’t have autonomy.
So you think the reason for countries like Canada and Sweden sending weapons to Ukraine is quite different than the USA?
I’m not even implying that premise is wrong, but it seems you would agree.
Swedes and Canadians would know better than me. I think the US security state establishment’s goal is to weaken Russia, for Russia to fight and maybe lose a costly war like Afghanistan. I think that goal is different than most individuals, including most US citizens, who just understandably want to help Ukrainians. And some of the US security state establishment’s goals for shipping increasing amounts of weapons to Ukraine and having US special forces training Ukrainian units to US standards might have been to provoke Russia into this sort of war, I don’t know. That’d be pretty cynical but I wouldn’t put it past neocons in Trump’s administration or Dick Cheney disciple Victoria Nuland in Biden’s.
I feel we’ve let you down
lol keed as usual. parroting medvedev’s whaasapp musings almost verbatim. proxy war, check. nuclear threat, check. “unprecedented” weapon shipments, check. mercenaries and instructors, check.
Seems like the unprecedented amount of arms we’re sending is at odds with wanting Russia to have a long and costly war. Seems much more likely that they’re wanting a short war with a decisive Russian loss. If I were America and wanting to thread the needle of bleeding Russia, especially if I didn’t care about destroying Ukrainian land, people, or civil society, I’d push for more of an Afgan insurgency idea that would bleed them over a decade than a military defense approach where Ukraine can outright win.
If Russia has pretty limited minimum acceptable war aims, like securing Donbass, a land bridge between Russia and Crimea, and securing water for Crimea, then a long grinding war maybe wasn’t on the table. Seems plausible that Russia could have achieved those goals quickly without the massive amount of US support. So you’re right that me saying “costly war like Afghanistan” is only analogous on the costly part. The war is very different in nature and the nature of the support is also very different. But a quick and sharp defeat of the Russians would be extremely costly to Russia, both in hard and soft power. As would a grinding stalemate. Which is more likely, or is either more likely than some sort of Russian victory? I have no idea.
You have dodged the question how many countries Russia gets to conquer before the US should do something. Is it just Ukraine or does Russia get to to conquer a few more? How many?
I don’t think I could possibly be more clear. I’ve said that the US should have left all the former Soviet republics to their own devices. Let them find a modus vivendi with Russia on their own, between them, Russia, and Europe. No need for the US to get involved in any way. The Baltics were admitted to NATO long ago, so that’s ancient history, but I wouldn’t have done that either. It worked out great for them though.
If you want me to accept your framing, well, keep waiting. But that answers your question.
Any thoughts as to why?
I am in touch with some Russians who are trying to fundraise to buy equipment for military units back home. It is sad how they don’t realize they are just NPCs the US has successfully conscripted into their proxy war against Russia**, their motherland**. I should probably tell them the truth, maybe link a Mearsheimer article or two.
Okay, so Russia gets to conquer and subjugate Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Moldavia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Got it. Do you draw the line there or are they allowed to keep going after that?
Conquer and subjugate? I don’t know about that. Like I said I think that those countries need to find a way of living with Russia on their own and I don’t see any compelling reason for the US to stick our nose in. The Russians aren’t going to invade Belarus or Kazakhstan because the Russians are happy enough with the nature of their relationship with those countries. Does keeping Russia happy enough to not invade mean that those countries can do whatever they like? No, no more than Guatemala or Nicaragua or Cuba or Panama can do as they please vis a vis the US.
Of course this is all a fantasy and actual US foreign policy is nothing like this, and we will seemingly try to limit Russia’s sphere of influence at every turn. To me that’s a dangerous game but who knows, I’ve been wrong before.
maybe those countries want to form an alliance of their own to stand up unreasonable demands of subjugation from russia?
of course, this is all a fantasy and actual RUSSIAN foreign policy is nothing like this, and they will continue to meddle in ukrainian, belarusian, moldovan, georgian, armenian, azerbarjian, kazakh, estonian, kyrgyz politics to promote candidates that will not constrain russia at any turns.
to me that’s a dangerous game, but who knows, seems like putin has fucked around, and is about to find out.
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1524865767904362509
I was scatching my head at the use of the word religion here because it makes no sense, as far as I know there’s no religion that says good ideas can only come from left wing politics, and then I realized that Glenn meant it in that “progressivism is a new religion” sense that those dark enlightenment types are talking about.